**11. References**


Digestate: A New Nutrient Source – Review 309

McDowell, L.L. & Smith, G.E, (1958). The retention and reaction of anhydrous ammonia on

Menardo, S., Gioelli, F. & Balsari, P. (2011). The methane yield of digestate: Effect of organic

Møller, H., Lund, I. & Sommer, S. (2000). Solid-liquid separation of livestock slurry:

Möller, K., Stinner, W., Deuker, A. & Leithold, G. (2008). Effects of different manuring

Möller, K. & Stinner, W. (2009). Effects of different manuring systems with and without

Nyord, T., Søgaard, H.T., Hansen, M.N & Jensen, L.S. (2008). Injection methods to reduce

*Management*, Vol. 28, No. 7, (January 2008), pp. 1246-1253, ISSN 0956-053X Paavola,T. & Rintala, J. (2008). Effects of storage on characteristics and hygienic quality of

*Technology*, Vol. 99, No. 15 , (October 2008), pp. 7041-7050, ISSN 0960852 Pfundtner E. (2002). Limits and merits of sludge utilisation – Land application. Conference

Plaza, C., Garcia-Gil, J.C. & Polo, A. (2007). Microbial activity in pig slurry-amended soils

Pognani, M., D'Imporzano, G., Scaglia, B. & Adani, F. (2009). Substituting energy crops with

Qi, X., Zhang, S., Wang, Y., Wang, R. (2005). Advantages of the integrated pig-biogas-

Renger, M. & Wessolek, G. (1992). Qualitative und Quantitative Aspekte zur Nitratverlagerung. Mitteilungen der Deutschen Bodenkundlichen Gesellschaft 68, 111-114. Rochette, P., Angers, D.A., Chantigny, M.H., Bertrand, N. & Côtè, D. (2004). Carbon dioxide

Vol. 102, No. 3 , (February 2011), pp. 2348-2351, ISSN 09608524

No. 3, (November 2008), pp. 209-232, ISSN 13851314

8305

0361-5995

229, ISSN 0960852

2009), pp. 1-16, ISSN 1161-0301

Tulln, 2002. pp.1-10.

821, ISSN 1359-5113

(February 2005), pp. 175-183, ISSN 0925-8574

ISSN 0923-9820

ISSN 0361-5995

*Biodeterioration & Biodegradation.* Vol. 63, No. 3, (April 2009), pp. 260-266, ISSN 0964-

different soil types. *Soil Science of America Journal*, Vol. 22, No. 1, pp. 38-42, ISSN

loading rate, hydraulic retention time and plant feeding. *Bioresource Technology,* 

efficiency and cost. *Bioresource Technology,* Vol. 74, No. 3, (September 2000), pp. 223-

systems with and without biogas digestion on nitrogen cycle and crop yield in mixed organic diary farming systems. *Nutrient Cycling in Agroecosystems* Vol. 82,

biogas digestion on soil mineral nitrogen content and on gaseous nitrogen losses (ammonia, nitrous oxides). *European Journal of Agronomy*, Vol. 30, No. 1, , (January

ammonia emission from volatile liquid fertiliser applied to growing crops. *Biosystem Engineering*, Vol. 100, No. 2, (June 2008), pp. 235-244, ISSN 1537-5110 Odlare, M., Pell, M. & Svensson, K. (2008). Changes in soil chemical and microbiological

properties during 4 years of application of various organic residues. *Waste* 

digestates from four co-digestion concepts of manure and biowaste. *Bioresource* 

Proceedings of Impacts of Waste Management. Legislation on Biogas Technology.

under aerobic incubation. *Biodegradation*, Vol. 18, No. 2, (April 2007), pp. 159-165,

organic fraction of municipal solid waste for biogas production at farm level: A full-scale plant study. *Process Biochemistry*, Vol. 44, No. 8, (August 2009), pp. 817-

vegetable greenhouse system in North China. *Ecological Engineering*, Vol. 24, No. 3,

and nitrous oxide emissions following fall and spring applications of pig slurry to an agricultural soil. Soil Science of Soc. Am. J. Vol. 68, Vol. 68, No. 4, pp. 1410-1420,


Gómez, X., Cuetos, M.J., García, A.I. & Morán, A. (2007). An evaluation of stability by

Kirchmann, H. (1991). Carbon and nitrogen mineralization of fresh, aerobic and anaerobic

Kirchmann, H. & Lundwall, A. (1993). Relationship between N immobilization and volatile

Knudsen, M.T., Kristensen, J.B.S., Bernsten, J., Petersen, B.M. & Kristensen, E.S. (2006).

Kratzeisen, M., Starcevic, N., Martinov, M., Maurer, C. & Müller, J. (2010). Applicability of

Kryvoruchko, V., Machmüller, A., Bodiroza, V., Amon, B. & Amon, T. (2009). Anaerobic

Liedl, B.E., Bombardiere, J. & Chaffield, J.M. (2006). Fertilizer potential of liquid and solid

Loria, E.R., Sawyer, J.E., Backer, D.W., Lundwall, J.P. &Lorimor, J.C. (2007). Use of

Makádi, M., Tomócsik, A., Orosz, V., Lengyel, J., Biró, B. & Márton, Á. (2007). Biogázüzemi

Makádi, M., Tomócsik, A., Lengyel, J. & Márton, Á (2008). Problems and successess of

Marcato, C.E., Pinelli, E., Pouech, P.,Winterton, P. & Guiresse, M. (2008). Particle size and

Marcato, C.E., Mohtar, R., Revel, J.C., Pouech, P., Hafidi, M. & Guiresse, M. (2009). Impact of

2008, Wageningen, 13-16 October, 2008. CD-ROM (*ISBN 3-935974-19-1*) Makádi, M., Tomócsik, A., Kátai, J., Eichler-Loebermann, B. & Schiemenz, K. (2008b):

*Bioenergy,* Vol. 33, No. 4 , (April 2009), pp. 620-627, ISSN 0961-9534

*Technology*, Vol. 53, No. 8 , pp. 6979, ISSN 0273-1223

No. 2, ( December, 2008), pp. 367-378, ISSN 0002-1873

99, No. 7, (May 2008), pp. 2340-2348, ISSN 09608524

*Research,* Vol. 21, No. 4 , pp. 165-173, ISSN 0049-2701

Elsevier Applied Science, 269.

1747-1753, ISSN 0038-0717

ISSN 0021-8596

ISSN 0016-2361

0133-3720

thermogravimetric analysis of digestate obtained from different biowastes. *Journal of Hazardous Materials,* Vol. 149, No.1, (October 2007) pp. 97-105, ISSN 0304-3894 Hobson, P. & Wheatley, A. *(*1992). Anaerobic digestion – modern theory and practice.

animal manures during incubation with soil. *Swedish Journal of Agricultural* 

fatty acids decomposition in soil after application of cattle and pig slurry. *Biology and Fertility of Soils*, Vol. 15, No. 3 , (March 1993), pp. 161-164, ISSN 0178-2762 Kirchmann, H. & Bernal, M.P. (1997). Organic waste treatment and C stabilization efficiency.

*Soil Biology and Biochemistry*, Vol. 29, No. 11/12, (November-December, 1997), pp.

Estimated N leaching losses for organic and conventional farming in Denmark. *Journal of Agricultural Science* Vol. 144, No. 2, (Online February 2006), pp. 135-149,

biogas digestate as solid fluel. *Fuel,* Vol. 89, No. 9, (September 2010), pp. 2544-2588,

digestion of by-products of sugar bett and starc potato processing. *Biomass and* 

effluent from thermophilic anaerobic digestion of poultry waste. *Water Science and* 

anaerobically digested swine manure as a nitrogen source in corn production. *Agronomy Journal*, Vol. 99, No. 4, (July-August 2007), pp. 1119-1129, ISSN 0002-1962

fermentlé és Phylazonit MC baktériumtrágya hatása a silókukorica zöldtömegére és a talaj biológiai aktivitására. (Effect of digestate and Phylazonit MC on the yield of silage maize and the biological activity of the soil) *Agrokémia és Talajtan* Vol. 56,

digestate utilization on crops. Proceedings of the Internationale Conference ORBIT

Nutrient cycling by using residues of bioenergy production - effects of biogasdigestate on plant and soil parameters. *Cereal Research Communications, Cereal Research Communications,* Vol. 36, Supplement 5, (August 2008), pp. 1807-1810, ISSN

metal distribution in anaerobically digested pig slurry. *Bioresource Technology,* Vol.

anaerobic digestion on organic matter quality in pig slurry. *International* 

*Biodeterioration & Biodegradation.* Vol. 63, No. 3, (April 2009), pp. 260-266, ISSN 0964- 8305


**15** 

*Tanzania* 

Agnes Godfrey Mwakaje

**Dairy Farming and the Stagnated Biogas** 

**An Investigation of the Constraining Factors** 

Dairy farming plays a key role in the lives of poor, rural people in developing countries, providing a major proportion of their cash income, capital assets, draught power, fuel and fertilizer. Small-scale dairying produces valuable food products and provides a regular income and work. Dairying also provides much of the cash needed to perform other socioeconomic activities. Milk production generates reliable incomes to meet household livelihoods (Somda et al., 2005). Possession of dairy animals means also financial security, status, self-confidence and an opportunity to have some control over their live (Ramkumar, 2004). It is also more labour intensive and supports substantial employment in production, processing and marketing. This is partly because dairy production often require the introduction of specialised dairy breeds and increased levels of inputs (nutrition and health care) and good linkages to markets, both for milk sales and input acquisition. In Kenya dairy farming has become a very significant source of income and food for an estimated 625,000 smallholder producer households and for those involved in the marketing of milk, in total some 25% of all households in Kenya benefit from dairy farming (Muriuki et al., 2001). In Tanzania about 700 000 dairy cattle are available under smallholder farmers, with an average of 4 cows per household, there might be 175 households keeping indoor fed dairy cattle in Tanzania. Dairy farming in Tanzania is estimated to grow at a rate of 6% per year and there are about 190,000 registered farmers currently (Swai and Kurimuribo, 2011). Most of these cattle are kept in the highland and relatively cold regions of Arusha, Mbeya, Kagera, Iringa and Morogoro. Smallholder dairy farming in Tanzania has had a significant impact on poverty alleviation in terms of income, education, food security and stabilizing

On the other hand, dairy manure is potential for biogas generation. Dairy manure biogas digester technology has proven to be technically and economically feasible and successful in many applications (Schwengels, 2009). Technology pathways involving biogas, natural gas or electricity are advantageous (Hedegaard *et al* 2008) for rural development. Empirical evidence suggests that each household can realise up to US\$ 724 by replacing wood use with biogas, apart from other positive impacts to the environment (Langeni *et al.,* 2010). A study by the Institute of Resource Assessment (IRA), University of Dar es Salaam, in 2005, shows a reduction of firewood consumption from 700 to 145m3 for Lomwe Secondary

**1. Introduction** 

farm incomes (Kisusu et al., 2000).

**Use in Rungwe District, Tanzania:** 

*Institute of Resource Assessment, University of Dar es Salaam,* 

